3 Ways The O.J. Simpson Saga Confirms Red Pill Truth

Donovan is a sexist son of a bitch who objectifies women by keeping them on their toes, their backs, and their knees where they belong.
Tune in weekday afternoons at 5EST/2PST for TSR: Live with Donovan Sharpe.
You can follow him on Twitter
, Facebook , and Instagram.

Back in early June, ESPN released their most anticipated documentary in their 30 for 30 series, OJ: Made in America, directed by Ezra Edelman. Though it’s been more than 20 years since the trial of the century, the O.J. Simpson saga is still among the most talked about stories to this day.

OJ: Made In America, for my money, is the final word on all things O.J. Simpson. It thoroughly and completely dissects every element of his life from his humble upbringing in San Francisco, to his stardom on and off the football field, to his murder trial, to his current stay in Lovelock Correctional Facility in Nevada.

Seeing the world through the lens of neomasculinity, red pill truth was confirmed at practically every turn of the 8 hour, 5 part documentary. So often, in fact, I had to pause it regularly to jot my thoughts down for this article. That said, here are three ways the O.J. Simpson Saga confirms what we already know here in the ‘sphere.

1. Men hate on men who live better lives than they do

Throughout the documentary the underlying theme that was prevalent in all of Edelman’s interviewees was the fact that his “whiteness” was the main reason for his downfall. Male after male, said things like “Being a sellout out cost him” and “I knew he was lost” were uttered by some of his closest friends and people who followed his life.

This was little more than men being envious of the life Simpson lived. O.J. had it all: Money, looks, and endless supply of women, and a trophy wife to boot. While famous black athletes such as Lew Alcindor, Cassius Clay (who later became Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Muhammad Ali respectively), and Jim Brown were fighting for civil rights, Simpson was living it up in Hollywood and had no intention of getting involved and it rubbed them the wrong way.

This isn’t to say that these athletes didn’t have a gripe in terms of being perturbed with O.J.’s choice to distance himself from the civil rights movement. Being put off by a young black athlete reaping the benefits of their hard work without having contributed anything himself is understandable.

But at the end of the day every man is in control of his own life and decides what he will and will not do. A lot of sports fans seem to have this idea that professional athletes have an obligation to speak out on social issues but that’s simply not true. Just because LeBron, Carmelo, CP3, and D-Wade use their platforms to talk about these things doesn’t oblige other athletes to follow suit.

People have always outwardly endorsed the idea that every man can do anything he chooses to and be anything he wants to be. This is exactly what they fought for. O.J. made his choice and because of that choice he lived a much better life than they did and it pissed them and every other black man who suffered during that time off.

So statements like “O.J. didn’t know who he was” or “He was in denial” by Joe Bell, lifelong friend, Danny Bakewell, a civil rights activist, and others are dead wrong. Simpson knew exactly who he was and wasn’t in denial about anything. Furthermore, he sure as hell didn’t care about what people wanted him to be. He was his own man regardless of what people said or thought about him. Any man with red pill knowledge these days acts much the same way and as a consequence, catch the same heat from other men like O.J. did back in his hay day.

2. Girls will be girls and hamsters gonna hamster

Female nature was front and center from beginning to end in this documentary. Let’s get right to it:

Projection

Robin Greer (a post-wall blonde who was prominent in the film), one of Nicole’s close friends laid bare her female nature for all the world to see. There were too many red pill nuggets to count from this chick but one that stood out to me was this statement:

“There was something about Nicole that was almost unattainable to O.J….something that he couldn’t quite control, and I think that was part of the attraction…

I literally laughed out loud when those words escaped her lips. Those in the know (read: neomasculine) know that nothing wets the panties of women more than a man who cannot be tamed, controlled, or kept. Female solipsism leads them to believe that sexual attraction is symmetrical. They consistently show their ignorance in these matters by describing what attracts them to men when talking about themselves or other women. I’ve touched on this in the past:

Blondie here wasn’t fooling anyone…..at least not men who are unplugged. Women love men who are unattainable and they project this attraction by defining themselves or other women in this way.

I will also add that she talked about being cornered by O.J. several times (presumably for sex) but never gave in to his advances. Even if I hadn’t seen the arousal in her facial expressions as she told this story, I still wouldn’t have bought it.

Women will always favor strength

The lead prosecutor for the Simpson trial was Christopher Darden. The DA’s office thought that pitting another black lawyer against the formidable Johnnie Cochran would even the racial odds in the trial.

Darden, by all accounts, seemed to be a solid lawyer but it was very clear from the jump that he was over matched by Cochran and his legal dream team. This was not lost on the jury, which was comprised of 10 women, and 2 men.

Darden and Clark were no match for Team Simpson…and they both knew it.

As most of us know, a pivotal moment in the trial was when Simpson tried on the gloves which, at the time, didn’t come close to fitting. I’m not going to go into the details in terms of what lead to the decision and the aftermath. But when juror #2 summed up the fiasco and what it meant to her personally, she once again confirmed more crimson capsule truth (I’m paraphrasing here).

I can’t believe he [Darden] did it [let O.J. try on the glove]. You let him [Cochran] play you. You were the weaker one. And you didn’t have to be.

She later said she felt sorry for him because he looked weak.

“If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit!”

Females pity weakness but more importantly they favor strength. That’s always the way it’s been and always the way it will be. Darden had enough evidence to lock Simpson up for life but because he, Darden, wet the bed when the pressure was on, the female jurors looked down on him which didn’t help matters in their deliberation.

Regardless of whether a man is a good guy or bad guy, has the truth on his side or not, if there’s no conviction, no strength, and no confidence, not only will women not respect him as a man, but everything they stand for is looked at as a joke.

Females love being owned by aggressive men

Throughout the documentary, Nicole’s friends and family members opined at length about how abusive Simpson was toward her and how possessive he was. The 911 calls and pictures of her bumps and bruises made it clear that their tales of his dubious dealings with his trophy wife were probably true.

Here’s the thing: This is the reason she stuck around for so long. No, I’m not saying she liked getting her ass kicked by her 6’2″ 210lb ex-football star of a husband every other night. But I’ve written before that volatility and aggressiveness are both traits females are attracted to whether they admit it or not:

…when a female is in a physically abusive relationship, there is very little boredom. No, there’s no fun in getting her ass beat, but the adrenaline rush that comes with the unpredictability of her lover’s volatile mood keeps her on her toes and for better or worse it keeps her around.

A couple of the many examples of this truth that stuck out to me was when Nicole “complained” in one of her letters that ‘he [O.J.] hit me when he fucked me’ and when she told an orbiter of hers “I think I like this guy” after she told him O.J. had been ‘forceful with her’ and ripped her jeans.

No, it is not okay to beat your wife for no reason. And no, Nicole didn’t think to herself “Boy oh boy I hope O.J.’s in a bad mood so I can get my ass kicked and call 911 again!” But excitement, whether it be terrified excitement or not, is still excitement. And no matter how much she complained to friends and family members, no matter how many times she called the cops (who, more often than not, didn’t file a report at her request), she was always going to love O.J. His abusiveness and volatility only deepened her feelings.

Few things in today’s sexual climate make women more loyal than the threat of violence, being owned by a man who shows that he can and will resort to violence, and being reminded of that on a regular basis. Nicole Brown Simpson was just another in a long line of women who was no match for her biological programming.

3. Alpha males always live the best lives

O.J. Simpson was a bona fide alpha male through and through. To add to that, he was probably a sociopath who exhibited all three dark triad traits on a regular basis depending on the situations he found himself in. He took what he wanted without apology or remorse, and could charm the panties off of any girl he wanted (one woman described this “phenomenon” as being “O.J.’d).

The O.J. saga is well documented and before this documentary, the public at large probably thought they knew most everything about his life and trial, myself included. But I have to admit that even I was surprised by a few of the stories that were told about him.

O.J. stole his best friend’s girl and made her his wife

The friend he stole the girlfriend from? A.C. Cowlings, the driver of the white Ford Bronco in the most infamous police chase in U.S. history. The story goes that O.J. and his friend Joe Bell were on their way to a party in another part of town. When they arrived at Marguerite’s (A.C.’s girlfriend) house, O.J. instructed Joe to sit in the back seat so she could sit in the front next to him.

Young Simpson and Cowlings

The rest, as they say, is history. O.J. ended up marrying Marguerite, who had 3 of his children. But the fact that the man whose girlfriend he stole ended up as a ride or die comrade is what separates Simpson from most men. Dudes steal their friend’s women all the time. It’s not right but it happens. But to then turn that man into your closest ally to the point where he drives the getaway vehicle for you as a fugitive of justice is rare indeed.

There was also a story where A.C. jumped in front of O.J. to shield him from a friend pointing a gun at him (supposedly a joke) and said “If you want to shoot O.J., you gotta shoot me.” Simpson’s infectious personality affected both men and women alike and he was well rewarded for it.

O.J. claimed Nicole as his property before she even knew him

According to an acquaintance, O.J. was with a friend at an exclusive club in Hollywood when a drop dead gorgeous 18-year-old blonde who was waiting tables there caught the eye of the ex football star. Not 10 seconds after she crossed their paths he looked at his friend, pointed to Nicole and said:

I’m gonna marry that girl!

O.J. knew he’d have her the moment he saw her

At the time he was still married to Marguerite but that didn’t matter. He saw what he wanted, claimed it, and made it happen. This is what alpha’s do day in and day out.

Unbreakable Frame

After he was acquitted for double murder, Simpson foolishly thought he would just move back into his Brentwood mansion and be loved and accepted back into the community as though nothing ever happened. Unfortunately for him, this was not the case.

People heckled him at golf courses calling him a murderer, holding up signs, and insulting him loudly. Anywhere he went he was ridiculed and persecuted by just about everyone. But through it all, as a friend said, he acted like he didn’t even hear or see it.

Call it denial, call it coping, call it whatever you want. But the red pill truth is that O.J. simply maintained frame. I’m sure it wasn’t easy and I’m sure there was a lot more happening beneath the surface than people saw as they hurled insults at him. But that’s the point. No matter what’s going on inside, never let ’em see you sweat. Simpson didn’t.

Eventually he would move out of Brentwood because the IRS seized his home but no matter what people said to him or about him, his demeanor was as stoic as a statue. That is the very definition of rock solid frame.

He was instrumental in his own defense

Carl Douglas, an attorney on Simpson’s legal team, regales us with a story about how O.J. took him aside after Douglas cross examined someone from the prosecution, looked him in the eye and said “Wipe that spit off your mouth!” Douglas obliged.

Douglas taking instruction from Simpson

According to Douglas, Simpson was in charge and made it clear early on. He’d tell his attorneys what to wear, how to wear it, which jurors to key on, and just about everything else. He was a control freak to the highest degree. He likely knew very little about the law, yet, he had no qualms with asserting his dominance over the men who literally had his life in their hands.

Simpson was keenly aware of everything

Anyone who watched the trial and observed O.J. mainly saw him sitting stoically and watching the proceedings. Little did we all know that he had complete control over his lieutenants and was pulling the strings behind the strings. One might argue he had almost as much to do with his acquittal as his legal swat team did.

Was O.J. guilty?

No. He was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

A better question would be: Did he do it? You know it, I know it, and O.J. knows it. All of the evidence pointed to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. I talked about this in a column last March:

Let’s face it. They had O.J. dead to rights. All the evidence pointed to his guilt (except for these) but because of the exploits of Mark Fuhrman, an obviously tainted jury pool trying to “make up” for what happened to King, and the best criminal defense lawyer money could buy, Simpson walked.

Anyone who doubts whether or not he killed his ex wife and her friend even before watching this documentary is lying to themselves. People wanted him to be not guilty….and he wasn’t. That doesn’t mean he didn’t commit double murder and get away with it…

…which is exactly why this confirms, yet, more red pill truth. Simpson was rich, which allowed him to hire a legal team that used the race card in the perfect city to do it in, at the perfect time just two years after the Rodney King incident, and was the beneficiary of an obviously biased jury pool (one of which was a former member of the black panthers who stood in the jury box and raised his fist in declaration of ‘black power’ after the verdict was read). In addition to an inept prosecution and racist cop who was made the focal point by the defense, it was the perfect storm that allowed O.J. to get away with murder.

This guy was made the villain and didn’t help the prosecution

What’s this have to do with the red pill you ask? Simple. Simpson should have been convicted. But he wasn’t. Women should be attracted to good, honest, men, who don’t abuse them, and take good care of them while giving them respect and providing them with a good life.

But they don’t.

What should be and what actually is are two very different things and the O.J. Simpson saga shined a bright light on what most of us here already know.

Submit an article for ROK and get paid

Starting in March, we will pay you in Litecoin cryptocurrency for any article of yours that we publish. If you have something to say to your fellow man, now is a great time to do it. Click here to learn all the details.

419 Responses

White women DROOL over black cock. They are practically foaming at the mouth to taste the forbidden fruit their redneck daddy told them to stay away from. They know blacks can reach parts of their pussy they didnt even know existed and reach new sexual heights never thought possible. I take full advantage of them and dump them in the trash like a dirty cum rag.

I hear Nicole Brown banged Marcus Allen and even referred to his penis as “driftwood” after a walk on the beach with her homegirls and coming across a piece of driftwood. She said quote “This is Marcus Allen.” I read this on a biography her best friend wrote.

Also, I’m convinced had this not had happened, I think OJ Simpson would have plowed through the Kardashian sisters as soon as they were of age. That is, if he actually did it.

I think they like “different than the rest”. Living in Ohio, I’m surrounded by normal “suburban” type dudes, or farm dudes. I have something of an “old West” type accent, am tall and in great shape and such, ride a cool ass motorcycle, and I’ve found that these things put most girls panties on the super-moist cycle pretty quickly, because you don’t find that out here much at all. I’m white as bleached Wonder Bread.

I’ll bet that does play real well there actually. I was being openly hit on in a bar on the Isle of Skye (Scotland), directly in front of my wife, by several ladies because of my “accent”. Shameless really, heh, but hey, nothing like that whole dread thing to do the trick later in the evening, ya’ know?

Draymond Green (olympic basketball team) “accidentally” posted a dick pic on the net yesterday. Tens of millions of white chicks have already emailed it to each other. All that feminism magically disappears when women have a 9 inch cock in their face.

I wasn’t even thinking “black”, but rather, the numerous examples of men of high stature with super hot wives who, for God only knows why, end up catting around with homely chicks, or worse. Think that Hugh…whatever his name is, English chap. Was married to some super hot babe whose name escapes me, but was out on the town with ugly hookers. Dang I feel like my disconnect from the media is nearly complete, I’m forgetting stars names that I actually knew at one time, heh.

Really! Tens of milions of WHITE chicks! LOL
Again, only when you’re jacking off!
I saw it. Big. But plenty of white guys have the same. A famous WHITE star w/same or nearly same size would get WAY more reaction. Emphasis on STAR.

I know you’re trolling here, but generally speaking blacks and whites have the same sized genitals. Whites retract more due to coming to age as an ethnicity in cold weather I believe I’ve heard, but fully erect it’s basically even. Plenty of big white dicks just like there are big black dicks, and small for small too if we’re going down that path.

I get the most wacked out fortune cookies don’t I? There was today, that you know about, and then one back in March that read “If you hold this cookie to your ear, you can hear the sounds of kung fu”. Heh.

I read somewhere (years ago) that the average white man has a penis some fraction of an inch shorter than the average black man. Statistically significant difference, but I would imagine it’s imperceptible when she’s got it in her mouth.

Well, it’s clear you don’t have a single idea in that head of yours that didn’t come from Roissy or Stormfront.
When you actually have an intelligent comment, come back and we’ll talk about racial differences. I get the feeling I won’t be hearing from you.

They manufacture big events to keep your eyes off the real history happening just beyond your line of sight. Here is just a short list of much more important events that were happening in those sixteen months:

1. In January of 1994, NAFTA had been signed into law and GATT was being updated in the World Trade Organization.

2. On May 6, 1994, Paula Jones filed suit against Bill Clinton for sexual harassment. Also in May, the Whitewater investigation was building steam.

3. On the very day Simpson allegedly murdered Nicole, June 13, the jury in Alaska OK’ed the lawsuit against Exxon for the Valdez disaster.

4. In June, JPMorgan bankers were creating the derivatives market, the market that would ultimately lead to the financial collapse of 2007—a collapse that is still accelerating.

5. In September of 1994, Clinton signed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, and of course the passing of that by Congress was helped by the publicity surrounding the Simpson case that summer

6. In February of 1994, a US jet shot down four Serbian jets in the Banja Luka incident. This effectively brought the US into the war there.

All these things were happening in 1994-95, while you were watching Simpson drive around in a white truck and try on bloody gloves. While the real world passed you by, you were living in the MATRIX.

you may be right, I started to read an article(had to stop about halfway thru it, yet another lie we’ve been told), it claimed he was set up bc he was a drug dealer for bigshots in hollywood, and owed a boatload to his suppliers. who knows

Iran was having a major insurrection over a stolen presidential election (which, some might say, would be the start of the “Arab Spring”) during that few weeks where Michael Jackson’s death plastered the news.

I’m not saying OJ didn’t kill the guy – I didn’t follow the case – but it seems odd for the media to focus so heavily on a relatively normal murder case.

Two equally attractive guys – one white and one black
Black guy is not ghetto.
White guy is not a simp.

If you go with the black guy, sooner or later you’re going to have to be ‘down’ w/all that #BLM Bullshite. You’re going to have to agree that Barack was a great president, Trayvon was a cuddly innocent, and IGNORE that MLK PLAGIARIZED wholesale chunks of his PhD dissertation at the risk of being called KKK.

One of the things I noticed in the documentary was a comment he supposedly made to a friend AFTER the acquittal and he moved to Florida. He said more women were coming on to him to fuck…and he was puzzled by it.

You can see the importance of red pill dominance in this case, indeed. I would also add that those men on the jury were likely betas. If even one of them was an alpha and felt Simpson was guilty, then that alpha juror could easily convince all the women jurors of his guilt. That is why women make ideal jurors because they are malleable. They have no true convictions or standard of justice that is absolute.

The desire for strength is also seen with prisoners. Woman send thousands of letters to violent inmates all the time hoping for some attention from the violent offenders. They propose marriage to guys like Ted Bundy, who hated women and killed them in some of the most violent ways. Guys do not send letters to female prisoners unless it is a death threat. Women on the other hand adore violence, dominance, and raw feral behavior. Just look at how many jump on board with Isis or how many women respect Islam despite the fact that many of them would be veiled or killed if Islam became the world religion.

In my book, “The Beta Male Revolution” (http://www.audible.com/pd/Self-Development/The-Beta-Male-Revolution-Audiobook/B01J2G23N4/), I divide men into four categories: Total Alpha male, an Alpha male with a few Beta traits & tendencies, a Beta male with a few Alpha traits & tendencies, and a Total Beta male. In my strong opinion, Simpson was either an Alpha male with Beta traits, or even a Beta male with Alpha traits. Total Alpha male types don’t seek marriage or long-term relationships. They just seek women to fuck.

You’re thinking of it in terms of today. We’re talking about O.J. Simpson in the 1980’s and ’90’s. The “rules” back then still favored marriage over catting around, even for alpha males. An alpha would marry and then have women on the side, for “respectability” when in the public eye. Always remember context when talking about the past. The world has changed so much in regards to intersexual relations in the last 20 years that it would be an unrecognizable horror show to somebody you teleported here from the year 1985.

I graduated High School in the mid 1980’s. The world I grew up in has almost no relation at all with the world today, when it comes to intersexual relations. It’s like viewing two different universes sometimes. Throw in Hipsters and everybody walking around like a zombie playing Pokemon Go and I wonder sometimes if I’m ever going to wake up from this nightmare, heh.

That reminds me of one of my favorite old jokes. A married couple are lost in the woods. A bear pops out and the husband yells “run.” The wife says “don’t be crazy, we can’t outrun a bear” and the husband says “i don’t need to outrun a bear. I just need to outrun you”

Actually @cheeseburgercheeseburger:disqus might get his wish. I believe the interwebs are probably sentient. It began with rule 34 (so there is probably all read a porn based on an app based on Attack of the Killer Tomatoes” and then moved to Wikipedia where, I believe, information is simply spontaneously generated. I realized this when I first read the entry on Maurice Merleau-Ponty and realized that no one could possibly be fucking dull enough to write that wiki entry. I think we have got to the point now where all thoughts are automatically generated spontaneously through a sentient intertubes.

Before his death, I sat in on one of this guys seminars (duh before his death) and afterwards told him he should write a modern version of this book to reapply his (largely correct imo) theories to the intertubes (and this was back in the late 90’s so the real instanity hadn’t really got off the ground yet. Sadly, he passed away. But if you read this you can very easily see modern application

Anyother brilliant scholar who I had the great pleasure to hear speak a few times, Hubert Dreyfus, reapplied Kierkegaard’s position on anonymity and authenticity to the internet much to the same effect. Here is an abstract. I can prob pull the full essay, but it would prob require reading at least some of the Kierkegaard in order to get the awesome and subtle argument that Dreyfus puts down and then reapply to modern world. I think you woul d enjoy both this and the Postman book.

I saw a family shopping last week. Mom and two kids were actively engaged, cgecking labels, prices and lists. Dad had the phone to his nose playing that waste of time when he should have been leading the family. Beta male syndrome?

This is an interesting question however. You are, of course, right about the rules favoring marriage over catting around even for alpha males. But I feel that celebrities of that time were following rules much closer to our current (lack of) standards.
What is even odder is that now that the world has caught up and everyone has just started acting like over sexed celebrities the celebrities seem to be getting more sedate and favoring marriage.

“Total Alpha male” = A (heterosexual) man who is 100% his ‘own man’ (i.e., does not allow other people, and particularly women, to control, influence, or dominate his behavior); Primary tendency is to avoid marriage and any type of long-term monogamous romantic relationships with women; Prefers either short-term non-monogamous, short-term monogamous, or long-term non-monogamous relationships with women; This man can get laid with women without spending a significant amount of money on women or without promising them any sort of long-term monogamy;

“Alpha male with a few Beta traits & tendencies” = A man who will seek out one woman (usually a monogamy-oriented ‘good girl’ type) for marriage, but will maintain at least one mistress or on-the-side lover; Has promiscuous and/or polyamorous tendencies, but places a lot of emphasis on emotional bonding and raising a family too; Women who are feminine and submissive very much want to be in a marriage or long-term relationship with men from this category;

“Beta male with a few Alpha traits & tendencies” = This is arguably the highest percentage of men in society; This is a man who is hardworking, usually intelligent and educated, financially self-sufficient if not flat-out wealthy, and owns an above-average amount of material possessions; Wants a wife and kids very badly; If you take away this man’s career success, his finances and wealth, his social status, his fame or popularity, and his material possessions, he loses his appeal with the vast majority of women he comes in contact with;

“Total Beta male” = The type of men known to be “incels” (involuntarily celibate), “White Knight” types, and “Captain Save-a-Ho” types; Women either completely ignore men in this category, or only treat them like “play brother” or “male girlfriend” material. Their sex life comes from prostitutes or Call Girls, or from masturbating to Internet porn

That’s my take fellas. Again, I say Simpson was either an “Alpha male with Beta traits” or a “Beta male with Alpha traits” He was NOT a Total Alpha male. Even by 1980s or 1990s standards.

I don’t know if I agree with that. He had an acting career that was starting to show some good signs just prior to him going looney, and was raking in cash from commercials and endorsements. He also retained a tight grip on his wife, life and side dishes as I understand it. The last thing he seemed like, reading accounts from other people, was some cowed pussy whipped beta.

His “acting” career if it ever existed beyond token black part was dead by middle age. His celebrity was all based on his athleticism. He was a washed up celeb burning through his savings on the way down with no new way to generate income by the 90s. Sports icon in the 70s, minor celeb in 80s, washed up by 90s. That trajectory is not unusual.

I’m just saying that at the time, he was still doing good. He had frame, he had his woman on a leash, had his shit together, and was popular and well liked. The descriptions I’ve read from him at the time hardly indicates some simpering beta, in fact he seemed like he controlled nearly everybody who entered within a 10 foot radius of his voice.

He had Paula Barberi who was very pretty.
But, not by being alpha. He had to pretend to be new age loving. That’s how that life is. They all pretend to be caring and loving. The total opposite of what Alpha males do.

It’s a lot different than what you guys think with women. You SEE things, but don’t really UNDERSTAND what’s going on. As a woman I LOL at how unknowing you are.

And OJ was no alpha in 1994. He was insanely jelly of a WHITE guy – who he also killed, that was attractive to his wife – Ron Goldman’s son.

The guy was a nice looking waiter.
Not a black guy.
Not an Alpha.
Not famous.
Just a nice looking guy.
And Nicole preferred him.

But what about her INSANE desire for the BBC! lol

She knew it, had it and RE-JECTED it.
In favor of a white ‘nobody.’ Although, no human is really a nobody, You catch my drift….wood! haha

Sorry, all those black guy myths are just propaganda.

Sure, in today’s world, a cute, well build black guy has 100x better chance than he did in the olden days.

Are you even trying to address my post, or did you hit “Reply” to me by accident? I wasn’t perpetuating any “black guy myth”, I was simply stating that he wasn’t some simpering beta schlub.

We understand you perfectly, baby girl. Don’t kid yourself otherwise. Or do, it really doesn’t matter, because at the end of the day you have nothing but an assertion and foot stomping and snark, where I have lots of living documented proof that we got it down pat for the most part.

Speaking of which, there is a movie from 2014 (I think) called “Guess Who’s Back?” which features Hitler as its lead character. It’s a clear jab at any nationalists in Europe who dare to not cheer their own extinction, but the producers/director did such a good job writing the Hitler character that it was shocking. He came across very personable, likeable yet very confident and masculine. I mean, and I hate to say this because I know how it can be twisted, but I really, really like the Hitler character in that movie. The directors thought, I guess, that they were showing something dark about humanity, but in the end all I came away with was that he was literally mopping the floor with wimpy men while extolling things like strength, as well as providing a very compelling use of psychology and manipulation.

They wanted me to get a feeling of guilt and shame from the movie, clearly, but I came away saying “Damn, now I see why people lined up and liked Hitler”. Which is probably not what they wanted people to take from that movie.

I’ve taken to reading compilations of his speeches and public/private correspondence. There’s more to Hitler than “KILL DA JUICE,” and it seems clearer to me every day why the Weimar people would set him up as ruler.

A few. According to his letters (and the accompanying historical record), he:

– Went into Austria because the mostly-German populace didn’t agree with the division in the first place

– Went into Czechoslovakia and Poland because they were killing Germans in the territory (after he sent several proposals for peaceful resolution which were ignored)

– Went into Norway, Denmark, and the Low Countries because the Allies were working to stage troops there for invasion, and he wanted to preserve these nations’ neutrality

– Appealed to Britain and France on numerous occasions to create a stable peace (no invasions on either side), but was rebuffed

In his words, he sounds like a nationalist forced to take military action to protect his nation.

EDIT: Oh, and he and Jesse Owens were on pretty decent terms after the Olympics. Apparently Owens was known to defend Hitler against accusations that he snubbed Owens, and Owens took such reporters to task for “disrespecting the man of the hour [Hitler]”.

I wasn’t alive in one of the relevant countries, so I have nothing but books and tapes to go on. But between these documents (real or fake, propaganda or not) and his recorded speeches, it’s hard to see Hitler as a tyrant bent on global-domination.

Of course he appeared confident. Else he would never have had the success he had.

But just ask yourself … would a truly confident man do what he did? All that propaganda, all the lies, Holocaust, etc. Of course, you could argue that he did not do many of these things, but, well, I kinda doubt that.

As I read somewhere else, Hitler was very likely a quite awakened person. But also very psychotic.

It wasn’t set in the 1940’s, it was set in 2014. He “somehow” appeared just above the Furherbunker in 2014, disheveled and unaware of how he got there. It was quite funny in parts, but in other parts it was very, very compelling. He did not come across at all like a raving loon, except for a few comedy moments (literally, meant as comedy), like when he shot a dog because it was trying to bite him.

A truly confident man will set his sights on what he wants and pursue it. I don’t believe true confidence will always manifest itself inside a stoic outcome.

Heh. I absolutely respect what Hitler did technically. I have his book at home. He had a vision. He wanted to make it real and had enough awareness to quickly realize that democracy was not going to be the way to do it. He did what was necessary.

Right, which makes the tie in to modern nationalism such bunkum right out of the gate. The movie was trying to make a direct tie between real Nazis and, say, PEGIDA or the Brexit people. It was so absurd that one would have to be utterly devoid of actual historical knowledge to buy into it. OR, and I think since this was targeted at actual German audiences, so full of shame that you’ll just swallow anything that they shove in your face compliently.

Heh. I think people are quite aware that it is satirical. But I did hear commentary about how shocking it was when he shot the dog. This is on purpose, I believe. They show his “good” sides, and then they put something in to “shock” and people will be like: Oh god, they were right, he is a monster. Oh god, I was fooled.

Krauts do love their dogs don’t they? It’s a weird obsession that seems to displace what probably was once their own self regard. Or whatever. I say this as a dog lover myself. I found the scene funny as hell, it was just so matter of fact. Dog tries to bite you what do you do? Why, you pull out your Luger and shoot it. That simple. Heh.

That scene was way before I started actually liking the character, btw. When he got serious, it became very interesting.

He’d never shoot a dog as he loved them! The book was published in Germany under the title “He’s Back” in 2012, I think. Why the bid deal anyway, Mel Brooks has done some marvelous satire on Adolf et al over the years.

Well, I think you may be underestimating how much of a big deal this Nazi stuff still is to many here in Germany. Although I usually only encounter this in online comments, less in people on the street. Then again, I never talk to people on the street. Heh.

Guilt has to end at some historical point for a Nation. Yes, it was understandable with the generation who were around during the 1930s and 40s, but, they’re almost gone now, and seriously making young Germans continually feel guilt and shame for a past they we’re privy to, it both grossly unhealthy and dangerous for Germany’s future.

It was because, to me anyway, he came across as the genuine deal. It really didn’t seem like a parody, it seemed like they literally plucked the guy from 1945 and set him down in the middle of Berlin and then stood back and observed him. That’s what made it so powerful in my view, it wasn’t “Hitler is a bad dude, let’s pretend he wore panties under his lederhosen, hahahahahahah!” It was far more serious, the comedy was just thrown in to help make the pill go down easier I think.

Democracy is not the way to do anything. The purpose of democracy is to fragment the power in million of little pieces to prevent a nation from going to excessive extremes like Nazi Germany had done. The downside is that everything is boggled down, decisions requires months if not years to be made and a change in the elected government might just undo everything good the previous enstablishment might have done. Strictly speaking democracy is a leash to curb or worst tendencies at the expense of our greatest potential.

Really wish I could find the chart again that split men amongst multiple categories. There was a positive and negative side to every type of male:
Alpha
Beta
Sigma
Omega
Etc.
If anyone knows where I can find that chart, please let me know. I’d like to further analyze it.

When I read the earlier comment, I read “fatalistic” as “conceiving of all things as preordained and impossible to change.” I only believe that to be true to a limited extent – there’s more flow on the Socio-Sexual Hierarchy than most admit.

I think so too. Besides, if it were truly fixed, it would be impossible to ever jump up or down in that hierarchy, because it would deny the possibility of there being infinite shades of grey in between.

Also, it is sometimes circumstantial. You may be “alpha” in one aspect of your life, but “beta” in another. It may be as simple as doing something you’re good at and being the team leader or being a novice and listening to somebody who’s good. Does not change “who you are”, but determines your position in that particular hierarchy.

Great point. That’s how I tend to view “alpha” as well, more of a meritocracy thing than a fixed title. I’m alpha in my pack of riders and around this areas biker bars, but when I sit down at work or pursuits outside of my specialties, I listen to people with more knowledge than me and give them the social helm. Human hierarchies are fluid, not fixed points, which is where a lot of people stumble I think.

Although there is this kind of person who just seeks to be alpha for sake of “being alpha”. They will act like the ubermensch even if they obviously have no idea what they are talking about. Empty dominance.

Listening to someone who knows more about a particular subject than oneself doesn’t correlate to be alpha or beta. It correlates to an understanding of one’s self and the desire to expand ones future. Alpha (without the subcateories) in my understanding.

“beyond redemption” is a bit of preachy judgement, but “no idea why society finds them disgusting” is more of a simple observation. Talk with those chaps a while and it’s not hard to see that they’re oblivious to their own social ineptness while simultaneously thinking that they deserve the cream of the crop from everybody around them. That’s kind of where that’s pointing, IMO.

Sure, I know where it’s pointing at, but as an author, you always have a choice on how to present facts. You can do it in an objective manner, you can do it in a compassionate manner, or you can do it in a judgmental manner.

To be fair, that’s true to an extent. Granted, no one is technically beyond redemption but after a certain point/age the probability of breaking out of the negative side of the chart is statistically unlikely.

I don’t think that has to be true. Well, yeah, you’re not gonna be alpha playboy at 80 suddenly, but I’Ve come to like to see things from a perspective of enlightenment and it’s never really too late for that.

I guess some people just have too much baggage to resolve it in their earlier years.

Alan, I am an admirer. I haven’t read your new one yet. But I feel like the “alpha”/”beta” terminology is probably reaching the end of its usefulness if we’re dividing it up into all kinds of sub categories. It’s very worthwhile when first coming to the red pill and soon after– it shows men exactly what they are fighting for and fighting against. But using it to categorize men who are awake already is like some catty sorority-house purity test.

Whatever else Simpson was or is, his own mental frame became toxic when he couldn’t handle the reality that his wife was playing him. And he destroyed himself (and her, and Goldman), because of it.

I don’t care when a coal burner gets killed, (sorry it’s how I feel, it’s disgusting to me, to bad they had children) but is there any indication she got on the carousel while married? It seems it’s certain she screwed Marcus Allen, Simpsons fellow team mate and by nature the same kind of guy but that was during the separation.

He certainly failed to move on.

Simpson and Brown were married on February 2, 1985, five years after Simpson’s retirement from professional football. The marriage lasted seven years, during which time Brown and Simpson had two children, Sydney and Justin. Simpson pleaded no contest to spousal abuse in 1989. Brown filed for divorce on February 25, 1992, citing “irreconcilable differences.”

Wrong & Lazy. The definition of oneitis is a man who only dreams about sleeping with one woman and one woman only and sees her as a unicorn and only having eyes for her and no other woman. OJ fucked hoards of other women while he was married to her so there was no onitis there. He killed her because he viewed her as his possession and she wasn’t acting right. It had nothing to do with oneitis. Just because you think one part of the “alpha male” behavior doesn’t match up does not mean he wasn’t an alpha. So if we find out Donald Trump sleeps with a teddy bear he’s automatically a beta? If it comes out that Vladamir Putin watches romantic comedies he’s a bitch boy? C’mon man. Every alpha male has beta tendencies but that doesn’t disqualify him from being an alpha. Your opinion is yours and that’s cool but it’s lazy.

This commenter did not actually use the word one-itis, but to me, the definition of one-itis has less to do with some particular arrangement or thought pattern, but with an emotional framework stemming from mommy issues.

Obviously, on some level, she must have hurt him enough for him to be willing to kill her. You may say that it was just him showing strength, but strength often is false bravado to cover up weakness. It’s basically what narcissism is about.

Well man I have been cut to my core with a pronged blade which was then twisted and ripped out again but I never thought about killing the girl.

I think OJ was a narcissist and viewed her running off as an insult that needed answering. I don’t think being hurt itself would be sufficient incentive to kill a woman because if it were, the streets would be piled high with corpses…

I suppose so. Most of us still have some sort of release for their anger. But when you push somebody too much, they break. And then you get those shooters. People think they are evil; to me, they are simply the logical outcome of somebody who has been pushed too much.

Absolutely right Tom! I have tried explaining this to people, but they do not understand. While I do not advocate killing, I do understand that constant stress, strain and getting screwed over can just make people snap. Over the past couple of years I consider it a miracle that I have not opened fire on my enemies and ended up in jail or a mental ward. Alas, time will tell.

Capone ran a massive criminal empire. OJ went to jail for B and E stealing his own memorabilia. It was one of the dumbest crimes I’ve ever heard of. All because he was broke off his ass due to legal costs incurred for oneitis rage. He was half-alpha/half omega.

There was an old article on here that said dogs were masculine and cats feminine, and I remember thinking “when was the last time a cat ever cared what I thought?” Everyone thinks cats are girly because of how they look and how they move around at first glance. But if you live with one, you realize that cats are nature’s paragon of asshole game.

I have a cat which I sleep with and a female German Shepherd, very well trained, female of course. My cat follows me through the street the same as the dog. Cats are also susceptible to Alpha presence.

The problem is, labels never accurately describe anything. There is no such thing as “capitalism” or “socialism” in the world today. There is no pure “alpha male”. OJ had many traits that were alpha, but he also seemed to have one-it is over Nicole, it’s true. He got too attached to her, he focused on her when he should have moved on, and he allowed her to manipulate his emotions. But just because he was a confident, cocky, talented guy doesn’t mean he had all the tools at his disposal to behave perfectly.

The key is to learn from guys like OJ, and learn from various articles on sites like this, as well as your own personal experiences. I feel like I understand the nature of men and women better than OJ did. But I also think OJ got laid a whole lot more than I ever will. There is a limited time on this earth that we can spend. OJ focused mainly on playing ball, and the girls fell into his lap. He definitely had some strong character traits, as this article depicts, but he is human and had absurd weaknesses as well. Calling him names isn’t going to work, because he isn’t going to fit any of those labels.

O.J. was a nigger thug and Nicole Simpson was, of course, a white trash slut. She got just what she deserved. I laugh every time I think about it. That all mudsharks would get the same. Needless to say, if they hang around long enough they will. Nice of the Negroes to take out the garbage for us.

Nicole Simpson is hardly the stereotype of the “garbage girls” that go out with blacks. In her prime you know you would have tried to bang her ten ways to Sunday, and I would have too. She was hardly some fat ass Kardashian or some 100 pounds overweight trailer trash chick.

That’s mostly correct except she didn’t deserve to get knifed. Its not just her though. Its white women in general. They say they are too good for the black mechanic servicing their car, but put that nigger in a sport uniform and he has millions, actually millions, of white women on social media lining up to suck his dick every day and night. What draymond green just did with his dick pic was totally intentional. That’s not an accident. He’s easily going to bang 100 white women, HB8 or higher, this year alone, and do nothing for it.

LOL @ “nigger thug.” Chris, I’m Black. And if you think O.J. was a “nigger thug,” then you’ve never really socialized with too many Black folk. I know Black guys that would make O.J. seem like an effeminate Boy Scout. True HARDCORE street nigga thugs. So, to call Simpson a “thug” is literally laughable for Blacks. Suge Knight, The Game, Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls were all more ‘street nigga’ types than O.J. Simspon.

Someone who commits violent crimes throughout their entire life, and at minimum, has no real respect for law and authority AT ALL throughout the course of their life. Many people have committed murder that were not necessarily “thugs.” Again, no real Black person would categorize O.J. as a ‘thug’ type. He is no street nigga.

Totally agree. Before the murders he acted more “white” than most white men, which he received some flack for as I understand it. He was “the black man it was safe for white people to like” as I heard it said back at the time. Kinda like a sports version of Jimi Hendrix.

Well, former NFL linebacker Ray Lewis said that, so you’re not being racist. Ray Lewis once said around the time he was involved in that murder charge (paraphrasing a bit), “What most people don’t realize is that just about all of the [Black men] who play NFL football on the defensive side of the ball are street thugs at heart. You have to be. You can’t be a middle class pussy type and play defensive football at this level. You can’t. Offense? Maybe. But not defense. Just about all of us defensive linemen, linebackers, and even defensive backs are thugs or semi-thugs.”

Some black guys objected to my previous note. Let me explain. O.J. proved he was what I said he was; not all black men are “The N-word”, not by a long shot, and all whites know the difference. As for Nicole, I do not have any sympathy for white women who engage in relationships with blacks, period. I do not believe in inter-racial anything. I have no hatred of blacks or anybody else but I think we should all stay in our own lanes. Nicole asked for it and she got it. No tears shed by me.

Over the years I have to say my views on this subject had evolved. I was absolutely convinced that the jury got it wrong (I am not opining on whether or not OJ actually did it) but looking back, I think they got it right.

The prosecution botched this case so badly that even a public defender could have won an acquittal.

No murder weapon… mishandled DNA evidence… Police witnesses of at best dubious credibility… at best they could place OJ at the scene but there’s nothing in the trial that could have proven that OJ committed the murders.

IMO the prosecutors were trying to become celebrities in their own right. That zeal to be famous clouded their own professional judgement. If they wanted to do the right thing, they would have waited until they had more solid evidence. Then of course Judge Ito let the whole thing become a media circus, probably for the same reason of enjoying the spotlight himself.

As we saw with OJ’s current situation, it would have been only a matter of time before he would have been incarcerated for something else.

I agree. After watching the 30 for 30 documentary, there is no way the prosecution was going to get a guilty verdict … even if Simpson did actually commit the murder. They fucked that case ALL UP. Too many mistakes, not to mention Furhman. They had to come back with a “not guilty” verdict.

If anything, the prosecution and police should have held off on making an arrest until there was sufficient evidence. At the very least that would have bought them enough time to build a far stronger case.

The OJ trial was FAKE. It was a psychological operation from the government. Divide and Conquer. Period. To start a race war. No one was killed. It was like a Hollywood movie. It wasn’t real. People, wake the f*^k up.

I have a follower of mine who always sends me Email messages saying things like this. Where is the evidence though? He always says, “Alan, I don’t want to insult your intelligence, but the reality is … most news stories are fake. They are contrived like a Hollywood movie or TV show. They are designed to distract you from what is REALLY going on in this world.”

My objective side wants to believe him …. but without hardcore evidence, I simply cannot.

Ask yourself – why did the trial get so much media attention?
Then read my earlier post if your memory is short.

The CIA hired an actor to stage a major diversion play and coincidentally (or not) Simpson appeared in the 1978 movie Capricorn One, which is about faking a Mars landing. It is about faking a major event. Why did NASA cooperate with Capricorn One? Damage control. The movie was conceived of and promoted by the government itself. They weren’t confirming the Moon landing was a hoax, of course.

So basically using your line of thinking can be used to call weather reports on the television faked distractions.

Circular arguments, I don’t count, as evidence.

Assertion as proof is also, not evidence.

Lacking proof to back the claim, my default position is disbelief. Conspiracy theory thinking was never something I have been inclined to engage in. There are real conspiracies, but nothing so large that it covers thousands of people. The law of averages alone would say that any such thing would get blown apart pretty quickly by people dropping out of the “plan”.

There are leaks, and many people know the truth. Others find
out the truth. But that doesn’t matter because total secrecy isn’t necessary. All that is necessary is that the leaks aren’t reported by the mainstream press. As long as the government and press stonewall and deny, the majority of people aren’t going to move past a certain point.

The CIA learned a long time ago that a small percentage of activists can be ignored, because the masses won’t follow them. Most people will follow the majority, no matter where it goes. That is why it is called the majority. Because of that, Intelligence only needs to manufacture the majority opinion. In other words, the majority of people don’t even need to believe something, they only need to be told that a majority believe it. That is enough to stop them from acting on their own beliefs or suspicions.

The government doesn’t poll the public to discover a majority opinion, at least not on important topics. The government just creates a majority opinion and publishes it. Most people then believe it—or at least believe it is the majority opinion—simply because they saw it published. Even if they don’t share the opinion, they believe they are in a minority, and therefore powerless.

Which sounds all nice and wonderful, but it does nothing to answer my question for proof that I asked of Chris. He’s making a positive claim that the O.J. murders never happened, despite there being a ton of people involved in the “orchestration” so I’m saying “show me”. Not “tell me how to twist my reasoning around such that I don’t need to see proof”.

You say “Conspiracy theory thinking was never something I have been inclined to engage in.” and yet you ask for a proof. Why? Your inquiry makes no sense as you’ve already made up your mind. What are you? A woman? LOL

I assume then you’re one of those people that think that communism and feminism are natural phenomenons, occurring completely by chance.

I ask for proof because I’m certain he will offer none. And then he’ll do what you just did, which is a standard cop out when, you know, there is no proof to present. “You’re not worth my time! *stomp off like a woman*”. Seen it once, seen it a million times. It’s so predictable I can script it out nearly word for word.

Communism and feminism are movements and they are pushed very openly by various parties. No conspiracies needed.

Anyone who is seriously considering looking at evidence contrary to their own beliefs regarding the Simspon trial, might check out essayist Miles Mathis’ take on the whole affair. Mathis likewise claims the whole thing was faked, and if you actually read and digest his logic and evidence without bias (which is really hard for most people to do), well…all I can say is I dare ya. I triple-dog dare ya (wink) –

I’ll be glad to give that a read. Believe it or not, I can actually read points of view opposite of mine objectively, or at least as objectively as somebody with an opposite viewpoint can. In short, I’ve changed my opinion on topics before because somebody presented a better case than I could defend against.

I am open to opposite views. Most of the time that makes no difference, because when presented with “evidence” I usually look at it, dissect it and walk away saying “Yeah, more circular self referencing rhetoric, not buying it”.

There are no conspiracies. Watergate never happened. Enron never happened. Rich people spend all of their free time trying to figure out how to give back all of the money they weaseled away from the masses…heh. (And the sky is green.)

Strawman. I never claimed there are no conspiracies. I just made an observation about the typical “truther”. I think most of them are a disgrace to actual truth and as long as they are around, people will never discover the true conspiracies simply because they will associate them with those nuts.

It’s not their hectoring that causes me to tell them that I’m open to actual facts, I simply wish to draw out their case if they have one. If that makes sense. 99.9% of the time they sneer and run, and the other 0.01% of the time I get at least some attempt at presenting a case. If the case is not compelling then it won’t change my mind to yell at me for not being open minded enough, but if the case is compelling and I can’t counter it with good reason and logic, then, well, they did a good job and I change my opinion.

What’s the old saying, “An honest man, when confronted with evidence that is contrary to his view, either changes his view, or he ceases to be honest”?

Yeah, I see where you are coming from. The thing is, last times I tried this (and actually asked good questions and made good arguments), I ended up being called a government shill, being accused of wasting the truther’s time (how ridiculous can it get?) and being kicked out of their holy super red pill Facebook group.

That is an excellent trait to have, good sir. I’ve had so many things I previously believed in, overturned in my mind, after viewing mountains of contrary evidence, that one of my favorite sayings these days is, “This is what I believe…at least for now.”

Funny that. Personally, it seems to me like most of all of my knowledge is in that third bin. Has always been. I never understood how people can be truly certain about something – outside from a purposely restricted system like formal logic or mathematics.

Even these deserve to be questioned from time to time. For example, I notice that a few irrational concepts like imaginary numbers and the concept of infinity are required to make mathematics match reality. This makes me question the bounds of the mathematical model.

It is not wise to keep all things in the third bin, but it is wise to know when something belongs there. Thus was Socrates hailed by the Oracle of Delphi as the wisest living man.

Oh, I wouldn’t say that I would never question mathematics per se. I am just saying: As long as you accept the rules of mathematics or formal logic as a point of reference, you can actually, within that frame of reference, make certain statements. But of course, applying this frame of reference to reality is an entirely different matter.

It’s not that I want to keep them there. It is that I honestly am very very seldom 100% convinced about something. Frankly, I can not think about a single thing I could tell you with 100% certainty.

Maybe my problem is that I won’t accept 99.9% certainty. My brain just won’t do it. The doubts will keep bubbling up. It is simply less stressful to me to sign with “I don’t know, I don’t really care” and be done with it.

I like to think I have five bins, with a “believed to be true” and “believed to be false” in the mix. These are things that I could easily sort into known (because they seem true) or unknown (because I lack certainty), but I can’t bring myself to go that far.

Tom, there are certain empirical facts we all have to accept without personal proof. For example, I believe that Britain is shaped the way it is on maps. However, I’ve never (although I’d love to) sailed around the entire 1000 odd coastline to verify this fact. Equally, there are myriad of facts about the natural world that I accept based upon the evidence about how things just work, like the way the central nervous system works or about photosynthesis in plants.

I’m really surprised that you approach the world with the need for 100% certitude. This was the way the Victorians for example view reality and “doubt” in their minds caused them much grief. Without ever analyzing it, I probably approach reality in the sense of what seems to be most probable and likely hypothesis in a given situation, while still being open to alternatives. It’s the only way, I can personally navigate myself through the world.

Read what Taignobias wrote below about the five bins. That is more accurately how I think.

So no, I am not 100% certain that Britain is shaped the way it is on maps, but:
1. I accept it as a truth as long as I don’t know any better.
2. I don’t really care.

What you see as a problem, I think, is that you think that I desperately need certitude. I don’t think I do. I am quite fine with my “wishy washy” beliefs. If it turns out tomorrow that Britain looks like a banana, oh well, nothing is lost. I won’t be crying over the big conspiracy, because IDGAF.

The thing is, I always have to cringe at these philosophical discussions. It sometimes seems to me as if they are just throwing big words at each other to outsmart each other. I just look at these discussions and think: Well. Why again do I need to be engaging in this? Why can’t I just shut up and enjoy whatever the fuck I am doing without asking weirdo questions?

Granted, I ask weirdo questions myself. But at least I try to do it in simple language.

That’s the thing with philosophy- when it becomes nothing more than clever word play among academics it losses much of its value and originality- for philosophy to have any real value in the modern world, it must be connected to the tangible and visceral activities we all do everyday.

Originally in Greece and still in the eastern traditions this sense was/is more alive. (Body/Mind/Spirit).

Yeah. When I think philosophy, I think of my life and of “real” questions that arise from it. More often than not, I realize that even these questions are not even meaningful questions. A lot of philosophy these days is just fighting over definitions and getting attached to words.

A good example, whenever there is a shooting: “(insert city) is in fear”.

So, everybody believes that everybody else is in fear, so they assume that it is probably reasonable to be in fear.

But one thing that bugs me, if you really want to know truth: What sources can you actually rely on? A lot of the truthers use manipulative tactics to push their ideas, like dark, mysterious soundtracks in their videos, short arguments that quickly alternate, not allowing the mind to actually process one etc.

I don’t believe the MSM too much. More than it deserves still, probably. But then, I neither believe indy media solely on the basis of it being “indy media”.

A lot of alternative sources are simply damage control facilities created by intelligence agencies. For example, if you go to Veterans Today it is stated in plain view – Journal for the Clandestine Community.

oh no absolutely. I am sure that the media blew this thing up. Really the same way as how all of a sudden a few years ago it seemed like shark attacks were on the rise….but it was just the media reporting it that way. I have no doubeyou are right about stuff like Zimmerman and Duke Lacrosse and a biased media understanding their own power and using it to push an agenda. But when we start talking about the CIA hiring actors and faking the entire OJ trial or faking the moon landing or Saved by the Bell being an illumanati run tv show we leave the world of reality and go over into nutsoville population FatherofThree

Good article TOm. I need to read more of your site. BTW: as a follow up, if you did a Venn diagram with one circle being conspiracy nuts and the other being “people who know how to use the term ad hominem correctly in a sentence” there is literally no overlap.

Right? These fuckers can’t even get my post card to my aunt’s house on time, yet they can control every single microscopic detail and take over the world. But you see, sir, the incompetence of the postal service is just a red herring to throw you off the trail and provide plausible deniability, why, it itself proves the conspiracy!

You hit the nail on the head. So many moving parts to these “conspiracies”, and no one thinks to factor in the number one reason to disqualify them: Government Incompetence.

95% of the people who work in government agencies are either too stupid, incompetent, parasitic, or psychopathic to get a real job that voluntarily gives them money for their services, so they have to get a job that is funded ceorcively.

The results are a bunch of people that are literally incapable of accomplishing half the shit they are blamed for.

I agree that I am probably making a hasty generalization. There are definitely real conspiracies, and I think you’re correct in what you say. They don’t need to be “competent”, if a vast majority of people don’t care to look at what is going on.

This was less about male-female and more about the realities of race. Marcia Clark made the mistake of believing the 10 black women that Cochran packed on the jury would feel their “femaleness” over their “blackness”. To no one’s surprise but Clarke and kumbaya Whites, the black jurors chose racial solidarity. The prosecution never had a chance. They could have had a confession from Simpson and it would have made no difference.

What’s this have to do with the red pill you ask? Simple. Simpson should have been convicted. But he wasn’t. Women should be attracted to good, honest, men, who don’t abuse them, and take good care of them while giving them respect and providing them with a good life. But they don’t.

More to the point. It is only by awareness and understanding that men can establish proper order. Most men are clueless, flounder about, follow the herd, etc. They assert “truths” that under scrutiny are revealed to not only be false, but the exact opposite of the truth. Why? Because they do not assert their minds.

That is, they simply accept the first thing that pops into their heads. I have also been guilty of this, no doubt I am even now in at least a number of fields and to some degree guilty of this.

Life is struggle. The contest is never finished. To be righteous means to constantly think and review one’s positions in a constant struggle to be in accordance with the Truth. To explore and to understand and to apply that understanding correctly within the circumstances surrounding.

I politely disagree with this article. Being driven insane with sexual jealousy over a decent looking girl is oneitus. A seriously violent case of it. And his conduct is Elliot Rogers level stuff. “I’m rich why did this girl leave me for a waiter?” etc

A lot of prima facie alphas are the most insecure people you’ll ever meet. OJ seems THE classic case

More like being driven insane over being divorce raped in court. According to reports, he was still paying alimony on the house that she was fucking another guy in! Chris Rock said it best: He shouldn’t have killed her, but I understand.

It’s funny. I had this very skilled Muay Thai instructor. In the gym, he was pretty much the alpha male. Loud, you know, and people adoring him and listening to him etc. He had some anger issues and was very open about it and no one would have dared (or cared) to criticize him for it.

He got a lot of attention on Facebook, too, and always expected “his people” to like his stuff, because that made him attractive to sponsors.

He also kept going about his “haters” all the time. He kept being angry about people who do not want him to be successful and don’t want to acknowledge his work. He called them jealous and haters etc.

Weirdly, I never saw any of those haters. Occasionally, someone would criticize him on Facebook (happened one or two times, I think) and he would attack them for that.

I thought that his rambling about his haters made him look very insecure, but I am pretty convinced I was the only one who saw it like that. His buddies more or less were spitlickers and reinforced him in that belief, saying “let the haters hate, you are great” etc.

Sometimes I liked stuff of his on Facebook, but only when I liked it really. One day, he wrote me a message, asking me to like his stuff. I told him that I found that too stressful. As a result of that, he blocked me and went from being very supportive of me and praising me in front of the others towards being cold and dismissive and acting as if I didn’t exist. He even threw me out of one of his classes.

Was he strong and alpha and all that? I guess. But underneath, I figure he was also quite an insecure bitch who craved attention and got angry when he didn’t get it the way he wanted to.

“Female solipsism leads them to believe that sexual attraction is symmetrical. They consistently show their ignorance in these matters by describing what attracts them to men when talking about themselves or other women.”

Well, men are guilty of projection, too. I’m gonna watch the documentary, as it sounds intriguing, so I am not making a judgment about this situation, but what she described could easily be true for a man as much as for a woman. Pursuing the unattainable is a mechanism learned in childhood.

Seeking out abusive men. Of course some women do it. Of course some hot women do it. The same is true the other way. Insecure men seek out abusive women as well.

And both sexes, when in such a situation, will tend to moan about their abusive partner and keep returning.

Not to say there is not an observable tendency of this being typically true for women, but I don’t think it is inherently a sex-specific thing.

“O.J. Simpson was a bona fide alpha male through and through. To add to that, he was probably a sociopath who exhibited all three dark triad traits on a regular basis depending on the situations he found himself in.”

Hm. While he was definitely a man with a lot of power, I don’t think “sociopathic” is very compatible with “alpha male”.

In contrast to a weak ass pussy who gets commanded around by his girl, he is definitely a better role model, I guess. But “sociopath” and “total pussy” are not the only two modes of existing as a man.

It sounds like your Muay Thai instructor is Obnoxious and not Alpha. Usually the loudest guys, and the guys who have something to prove all the time , with a puffed out chest, (and here’s the worst) and the guys who beg people to like them, are just beta.

Well, most people respected him and he was a good fighter and strong. So you end up wondering what alpha is. Being fit, having girls, having business and money? Or is there something deeper than that? Cause any of those things can be pursued as a means of receiving validation.

It really wasn’t that complicated. Nicole couldn’t resist the initial attraction and financial benefits of staying with OJ. When she finally decided it wasn’t worth that much abuse, she had enough of OJ. The down played issue of Nicole having an affair with Marcus Allen was the grand finale in OJ’s classic feelings that if he couldn’t have her, nobody else would ever have her.

Oohhhh, I don’t know, sounded to me like he was a rather jealous insecure asshole who put up a good front. He tried to control everything and everyone because of his insecurities and he went off the grid and killed his old lady and her boyfriend because if he(OJ) couldn’t have her nobody could. Where an alpha would have put her ass in the road and got himself another one.
Also the reason he had women falling all over him was because of fame and riches it had nothing to do with him being an “alpha” male. Any idiot who is even remotely famous and rich can get women without even trying I bet Chum-Lee and Big Hoss are knocking it down right and left.

Good to see you back Donovan! I agree with most of this but I have to take a difference stance on the whole frame thing. He lived in the same neighborhood but he ran into the arms of the black community because he was ostracized by the white community. IMHO I think his frame crumbled when he did that. Other than that, great piece!

“OJ: Made In America, for my money, is the final word on all things O.J. Simpson.”

Wrong.

“If I Did It: Confessions Of The Killer” is, for NJDude37’s money, the final word on all things O.J. Simpson.

It’s the memoirs of a man who had everything, and destroyed everything around him because he let a woman drive him nuts. Here’s OJ recalling his feelings on the afternoon of June 12, 1994:

“I was trying to figure out how it had come to this. I’d been somebody once. I’d had my glory days on the playing field, a number of high-paying corporate gigs, many years as a football analyst, and even something of a career as a Hollywood actor. It wasn’t over, not by a long shot, but everything seemed more difficult now. …[I]t seemed like every day it took a little more energy, and Nicole was sapping up a lot of my goddamn energy.”

Every young man should read this and learn: if any woman makes you feel the way Nicole made OJ feel, kick her to the curb.

So after nicole brown uses up the best years of her life riding the cock carousel as a sports groupie fucking black athletes for their alpha status and getting abused, she re-enters the dating market as single mom past her prime, and finally gives a chance to the white beta male friend-zoned ron goldman… who then pays for it with his life.

“Regardless of whether a man is a good guy or bad guy, has the truth on
his side or not, if there’s no conviction, no strength, and no
confidence, not only will women not respect him as a man, but everything
they stand for is looked at as a joke.”

Which is a great argument for women (and blacks) not being allowed on juries.

BTW, Nicole Brown was mentally ill. Nothing more, nothing less. Any white female who crosses the line that she crossed is mentally ill. Wealth and fame makes no difference hear. She was one of the 4% of white females with severe enough mental illness to cross the line.

I learned recently that 18 year old Nicole had sex with OJ on their first date (I thought it was through this series–perhaps the author missed that?). Apparently OJ had gotten forceful with her, but Nicole seemed to like it, because she went on to date and marry him, and have his babies.

To anyone interested in further glimpsing into the mind of OJ and Nicole, I highly recommend the audio book of “If I Did It” read by G Valmont Thomas. It’s quite simply the best voice acting I’ve ever heard in an audio book, but you also get to understand OJ and Nicole in a way that an outsider writing about them never could.

OJ was a control freak, and obsessive (he would sit outside Nicole’s house and watch her screwing other guys through the window). But Nicole really brought a lot of his anger upon herself. No one deserves to die because of their words or mostly harmless actions, but she was slutting around, using drugs, and bringing guys over for one night stands while her kids– OJ’s kids–were asleep (hopefully) just a few feet away.

She played passive aggressive. She pushed his buttons. She purposefully slept with Marcus Allen, OJ’s close friend, just to piss him off. This kind of shit is not acceptable, and while I don’t condone murder, after hearing his side of things, I understand why it happened. He lost his temper. He was an angry and jealous and proud guy. He likely had some head trauma from years of football. You don’t push the buttons of someone like that. If you do, you get knocked out like Ray Rice’s girlfriend, or worse. As for Ron Goldman, the dude just happened to be in the wrong place–at the house of OJ’s scantily clad ex-wife–at the wrong time.

Not about the bitch.. It was the idea of giving innocence for a guy running in a white broncho looking and talking guilty as hell. When it was over- one side cheered and the other didn’t. There was a very pure color line – like it or not. It sent me a loud and clear message that blacks will never be a part of white society and vice versa. You decide how you see it.

Yeah, OJ’s behavoir right after the double murder screams “guilty, guilty, guilty” but ignore the obvious.

I was in college when the trial was going on and was asked the night before the jury’s decision by a black colleague what I thought the outcome would be. Me: “How many blacks are on the jury?” He laughed and said “9.” “He’ll walk.”

I was actually more surprised by white peoples reaction to the announcement. They really believe rich people are held accountable? Shit look at the Clintons.

You do realize that this site was created by a man of middle eastern descent who has traveled around Europe fucking white women, and who made his money writing books telling men how to fuck those white women?
The cognitive dissonance on this site is ludicrous.

It’s hard to reconcile the fact O.J. was consumed by jealousy, and yet he maintained Alpha frame? Maybe he had the charm of a sociopath, and his celebrity, athletic build, and confidence got him the girls. Obsessing over Nicole is *not* ZFG. Still, Donovan makes a lot of good points, and helps examine the saga further.

OT, but I’d love to hear the author Donovan’s take on the Roots remake just released. It’d be interesting to hear from a black American man who doesn’t have a chip on his shoulder the size of Al Sharpton’s old-school butt.

I’d argue that the fact that Cowlings was still cool with OJ even after losing his girlfriend to him would make Cowlings more of the alpha male in that situation, as he clearly did not let that get in the way of their friendship.

This entire article is complete nonsense…so many errors I do not know where to start. First , Simpson’s dream team did a horrible job…they were lousy….yeah they got an acquittal but not because of anything they did. Except for Bailey, this was the first murder trial for the rest. And Bailey was on a big losi g streak. Simpson and his attorneys made so many mistakes. The prosecution was even more horrible and it was not Fuhrman’s fault …he was one of the more qualified detectives…yeah he used the n word……thats not admissible and there was another big problem…a biased incompetent judge Ito. First big prosecution mistake was Garcetti transferring the case out of santa Monica….no reason to do that. And the jury was extremely biased, but the evidence was so over whelming that a competent prosecution along with a judge who knew the law, would have gotten a conviction. The whole case reeks from top to bottom

Even if the question of racial epithets had not come up, the fact that Fuhrman asserted his fifth amendment rights 3 times with regards to planting evidence would have similarly destroyed his credibility as a witness.

You are wrong. He pleaded the 5th because of and after of the n word nonsense. The whole thing is a non-sequitur of massive proportions. The idea that a white cop uses the n word in last 10 years so he must have framed an innocent man for murder. Question was inadmissible, Ito blew it, but its easy to see why….Ito had a conflict with Fuhrman….Ito should have recused himself….Fuhrman had run in with Ito’s wife, who had been Fuhrman’s incompetent affirm action female boss. Fuhrman had been to Simpson’s house before on domestic violence calls. LAPD and Fuhrman gave OJ preferential treatment by not arresting him on several occasions. Prosecution was horrible, judge was worse, dream team was incompetent, and jury was horribly biased and uneducated. But evidence was so overwhelming a good prosecution should have convinced even the most biased jury. Check out Vincent Bugliosi’s book Outrage….

Ito knew the law, he was corrupt…..let the trial become a circus. Prosecution was incompetent and lazy. Didnt bring in the suicide note which reeked with guilt. Absolutely horrible. The closing statements were terrible. They let Simpson get away with murder, Nicole, Ron Goldman, the families and the people of CA deservd better.

It was more than that. The “n-word nonsense” included other witnesses who claimed that in addition to saying the n-word, he also falsified evidence. There were also taped interviews where he said the n-word.

“Was the testimony that you gave at the preliminary hearing in this case completely truthful?” defense attorney Gerald F. Uelmen asked in a quick, pointed confrontation with Fuhrman, who has told jurors he found a bloody glove at Simpson’s estate. “Have you ever falsified a police report?”

And most strikingly, “Did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?”

After each question, Fuhrman leaned over, whispered to his attorney and then sat stiffly straight to answer: “I wish to assert my 5th Amendment privilege.”

There was a time when I’d never have believed that police would ever plant evidence. I was corrected of that thinking by a coworker who had been a big city cop. As for Fuhrman, there’s no evidence that he planted evidence or did any of the things asked by Uelmen, but there’s no doubt that Uelmen would have been ready for any answer that Fuhrman would have given that wasn’t an assertion of the 5th.

Indeed, you should always have a reason. One thing I have discovered though is that chicks love it when you demonstrate martial arts techniques on them. I flipped my chick several times on the weekend and it made her giggle.

It’s a make-believe world we have today in which someone can be elevated to a powerful status based on commercialization supported by fiat currency.

Football is nothing but guys running around on a grass field chasing another guy carrying a coconut. Once upon a time, a group of jews came along and installed the federal reserve act and gave themselves the ability to print fiat currency backed by YOUR credit. Wall street and corporations grew up around the central banking systems (as warned by Thomas Jefferson). From there, commercialization came about where large sums of fiat currency were traded for contracts (by corporations supported by wall street supported by the central banking system) to TV networks to air footage of black guys running around on a grass field chasing another black guy carrying a coconut. This resulted in more contracts and large sums of money being given to the fastest coconut runners, best coconut throwers, and best coconut tacklers.

This simply led to black guys that were born to welfare black mamas paid for and supported by your tax dollars and your labor. Then the black guy is discovered as being a fast coconut runner (let’s call him OJ). The black guy is given a huge amount of fiat currency to run with a coconut while a TV camera is pointed at him. Then the black guy can now walk around in society and point out what 18 year old blondes that he wants to have rape sex with.

OJ was nothing but and nothing more than just a welfare kid from the hood that would have become nothing more than any other black guy. Fiat currency and jews made it possible for brown colored degenerates born to brown colored welfare mamas to live in luxury and marry your white blonde daughters. White people are so stupid today. That is why I don’t watch sports. Based on the amount of money and lifestyle awarded, it’s obvious that society values someone that can hit a ball with a stick or throw a ball through a metal ring more than someone that is an engineer that designed and innovated the world we live in today.

The bread and circus entertainment industry is part of the fiat system. The outrageous sums of money that players and celebrities are paid come straight from the same band of fiat printers whose fellow tribesmen manage the circus. The whopping salaries are easily alotted. The players deliver in turn a massive fan base of loyalists to the producers of the entertainment circus. (to ‘the tribe’). It’s time consuming and a distraction from genuine tribal identity.

WILLIAM SHATNER’S wife Narine Shatner, a post wall model, Al-anon regular and 3rd wife of Shatner was found by Shatner himself as she lay at the bottom of their backyard pool. Shatner called 911 and stood waiting for them to come instead of jumping into the pool and pulling her out. His reason for not jumping in to get his wife: – – Shatner was wearing a $2000 toupee on his head. He didn’t want to get his new toupee hairpiece wet and ruin it so he waited a half hour for EMS to arrive and pull her out. . . NOW THAT’S docu-movie material right there.

Bonnie Lee Bakeley, spouse of Robert Blake was murdered. Friends and associates of Bakeley stated that they couldn’t think of many reasons why Robert or anyone else WOULDN’T have wanted to kill Bakeley. She must have been a terrible bloodsucking vamp.

But Shatner and Blake were both whiteys and so were their boring wives. Nothing new to rub the public’s faces in there. It’s true the OJ sensationalism had mostly to do with the media using real life pictorializing and promoting inter racial couples. Episode after episode of discovery and trials always had 20 or so shots of ‘black dude fucks, marries (and kills) the sexy baddest of the white bitches’.

If you look at other ‘white on white’ suspected spousal murder cases that were far more mysterious and newsworthy and that were in all much more worthy of probing documentary, you’ll notice that the ‘white on white’ cases of the time were glossed over and not sensationalized. Why? Because the hyping of OJ was to push race mixing.

The ’94 media coverage of OJ was for the most part intended to plaster pictures of the side by side faces of an interracial couple on national news and tabloids. During the summer of ’94 every night I remember seeing the side-by-side ‘black man – white woman’ screen shot on TV over and over and over and over until it became obvious the media was primarily just rubbing everyone’s face in a screen shot of ‘black man – hot white chick’. The case itself wasn’t even intriguing and other than OJ being a celebrity, the mudshark was just another hollywood no name ho.

The whole thing was sensationalized beyond any similar ‘white-on-white’ murder case previous. I can’t remember any time in the 80’s or before seeing hundreds upon hundreds of the same inter racial theme pixie click shot shown for nothing more than implanting the image of ‘black man – sexy bad white ho’. That’s what it was really all about. Engraving the image of ‘hot white slut, you go with big black dude’.

And the car ‘chase’, sheeit you call that a chase? It was slow and boring as it gets. He even used his turn signals. He was a broke nigga. He had a loose black dick but if he was a real nigga, he would have broke out like Rambo and laid out motherfuckers all over the place. NOW THAT would go down in the anals. Whites like Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrett went out shooting back and they weren’t even black. OJ was one broke ass nigga. You could see the boredom of the whole story with the slow driving, how it took on an aire of dream state running like the way you try to run in a dream but can’t, how it was patched up and lumped over with the ‘black man SCREW THE WHITE WOMEN’ message. That’s your MSM whore media for you.

“Regardless of whether a man is a good guy or bad guy, has the truth on his side or not, if there’s no conviction, no strength, and no confidence, not only will women not respect him as a man, but everything they stand for is looked at as a joke.”

The problem with some of the white nationalist commenters is that they inevitably end up white knighting for unrepentant sluts. If a white woman wants to suck black dick, she’s a degenerate whore, and that’s about all. No reason to start some alarmist campaign about the high rates of black male violence towards white girlfriends; those chicks asked for it, so quit defending them.

And that may be why no “white nationalists” ever bothered to avenge Nicole vigilante-style. Look at who OJ’s victims were; a coal burning mudshark who craved black dick, and a Jew. White nationalists wouldn’t waste their time avenging such victims.

“Women should be attracted to good, honest, men, who don’t abuse them…” urm… I think you’ll find that most women are! I’m with a good man and most of my female friends are with good men. Women who love ‘Bastards’ are the exception, that’s why they are the subject for discussion because they are unusual. Most women want and get good husbands who they have love and respect for. In the UK 2 women a week are killed by a partners or ex-partners and x-million are not! Being in an abusive relationship is not the norm.

I agree with the fact that most women are, but here’s the part you are leaving out: Women who are attracted to good honest men are post wall sluts looking for a man to rescue them from their bad decision. I guarantee you that you and most of your friends are past 30 and if not you’re not too far off.

You see sweetie, there’s a difference between attraction and arousal. You’re attracted to your good man because he doesn’t know about your slutty past and he’s the only one who’ll have you. Arousal happens when you were 10 years younger getting fucked by bad boys. Money makes a man attractive, beards and tattoos make them arousing and you know this.

Once again, you confirm female nature. You left the other half of the story out. I have no doubt that you and most of your so called friends used to love bastards (quite frequently I imagine) but you decided you’ve “grown up” and you are all “past that phase”.

Here’s how predictable you are. Your response will include some variation of “We’re all in our 20s” and “We’re not sluts we’ve only slept with 5 guys” and anything else that validates your point. Let me go ahead and save you the trouble of telling you myself and nobody here buys it.

Most women do want to get good husband AFTER they’ve ridden the cock carousel. But you left that part out.

Beards and tattoos! What are you on about? Those guys sound gross! I have never shagged anyone with either a beard or a tattoo, tattoo I find particularly foul as they make me feel a bit sick.
It sounds to me as if you’ve been hanging around some extremely dodgy women.
I agree that I am past 30, however I have been with my husband for 15 years so was in no way desperate or looking to be rescued from a ‘cock carousels’ (which sounds great fun by the way) when I met him.
My husband knows everything about my past. I entertain him with tales from my misspent youth regularly. Don’t think I’ve ever fucked a ‘bad boy’ though, everyone I’ve shagged has been nice enough.
But if you’re convinced I love bad boys secretly I guess there’s nothing I can say. Dangerous for you though, I think ‘know your enemy’ is good advice and you’ve decided not to get to know women at all (hope you don’t see them as the enemy but I think you might) you’ve decided that all women are the same and all (bizarrely) want to shag men with beards and tattoos! When you come across evidence to the contrary you dismiss in as a lie. Poor you. I don’t mind if you don’t believe me, it is true and my wonderful husband who I love and fancy is in the next room right now – that’s all I need to know.

Mmm. You were a beta gum chewer. You chewed on kind mild betas like a pack of wrigleys gum, one after the other until the flavor wore off, and with each one, you likely manipulated your own happy transition to the next beta. I’ve known liberated young women of this age that follow that plan espoused by the cosmopolitan mags. Your men weren’t bad boys but typical betas who didn’t know how to properly manage a woman per patriarchal order. In the beginning, you never surrendered unto the man your body and soul to whom you surrendered your virginity. A lot of older dry hens who finally settle live a decade or two with some tolerable beta so long as the beta remains predictable to the house taming. He’s already given up on any idealism like bumping you down a totem pole for a younger sister wife entering the clan.

Human females lose their fertility at half life whereas males have lifelong juice power. We are not a matriarchal species. Only the bee or ant species have a big queen larve egg sack that has lifelong fertility and the queen B presides over lesser warrior or worker betas that are expendable. Young human women who chew up and discard other young beta males are mimicking the matriarchal insectoid pattern. Those young slut puppy chicks have like some kind of freaky big ‘BUG MAMA’ complex.

Gosh what a weird response. I didn’t chew and discard anyone. I had a few youthful flings, one fairly serious relationship and then met and married my husband. No chewing involved.
We’re not really into the whole biology animal Kingdom model of living partly as it’s a stupid idea and also as neither of us want kids – so we’ve effectively already opted out of its ‘rules’. We’re just living our lives together and that’s it. But if you want to live your life according to the model of bugs then good luck to you!

There it is again. “A few youthful flings” You’re not putting a number on it because that number is in the triple digits. And his response wasn’t weird. It was shockingly accurate. But you wouldn’t know that as you’re a woman.

Keep it up Fiona! Like the article said your only confirming what we already know here!

You are so right. This ‘sophisticated’ logic is far beyond my humble powers. So you lot know more about my past than I do? Is that right? See that’s the bit I find hard to understand. I must be so dum.

Yeah actually. You’re right on both counts. Women’s pasts are all the same. Fucked your way through a bunch of guys then get married to the only one who’ll have you. And yes you are definitely dumb as you’ve misspelled “dumb” and “accuse” You continue to confirm everything dear. Keep it coming.

It’s true I’m terrible at spelling, particularly when typing while walking. But as for women’s pasts all being the same I can’t agree. The women I know have a mixture of pasts. Do you think perhaps you should try getting to know a wider variety of women?

You’re so full of shit it’s hilarious. You say you don’t THINK you’ve ever shagged a bad boy. This means you HAVE shagged bad boys in the past and have given yourself plausible deniability so you can go back and say “well I said I didn’t think I did so technically I wasn’t lying!”

Then you characterize your slutty past by calling it “tales from my misspent youth”. Call it what it is. YOUR SLUTTY PAST. Which confirms you are a slut.

Your husband is not entertained by your shagging shenanigans, he is repulsed by it. But because he’s a “nice guy” he’s not going to tell you that. And he never will.

“Everyone I’ve shagged has been nice enough.” LOL Of course they are. They wanted to shag you.

Listen dear, you’re a slut who got wifed up by a man who doesn’t know any better and doesn’t have any options. You’ve been with him for 15 years, but you probably had an on again off again relationship meaning you continued to sleep around. I’d probably put your notch count at or near triple figures.

Again, you’re not fooling anyone here by parsing words. Quit while you’re ahead. Everyone here knows who and what you are.

I don’t mind if you want to call me a slut (we say slag where I come from). You’re obviously free to say whatever you like. I don’t find being called a slut offensive as I don’t think there’s anything wrong with shagging around, I don’t do it, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Call me all the names you like if it makes you happy, I’ve never met you and never will so what you think or believe is of no consequence. Knock yourself out.

What I mean when I say I don’t ‘think’ I’ve shagged a bad boy is A – I’m not sure what your definition of a bad boy is, it seemed to involve beards and tattoos and I’ve certainly never fucked anyone will either of those and B – as far as I know they weren’t bad boys, in my youth I did it with a couple of people I didn’t know that well so perhaps they were bad boys but didn’t display it during our short acquaintance, there was no evidence of it but I can’t say for certain and I wouldn’t want to lie to you.

I like your idea of my husband being secretly repulsed! What a strange man you think he is. Why would he pursue and marry a woman he’s repulsed by? He must be a nutter and he’s certainly had me fooled all these years. Oh well, as long as he continues to pretend to love and respect me I don’t see it being a problem. LOL.

You obviously think you’ve seen deep into to my character and marriage. You must be very proud of your insight. Please tell me more about myself if you’ve time, it’s all most diverting.

“I don’t care about the opinions of a random stranger on the internet but please watch me while I debate my personal sex life with random strangers on the internet. By the way, I’m happily married and just stumbled across a men’s site on my way to church, which is full of nice guys. I don’t even know what a bad boy is, tee hee, and I think slutting around or being a slag is just fine and dandy, although I would never do such a thing myself. OK tah tah for now, gotta get back to being an awesome wife!”

Church!? No way! I’m not a Christian. I would have happily been a slag actually, but I met my husband and fell in love at a frightfully young age and that was my slut career over. I’d only had sex with 5 men, sad in a way. Maybe discussing my sex life with strangers is my way to get a small illicit thrill…gosh, what a boring old wife I’ve become! Bloody loving all this attention from strangers, more please.

Translation: “Church?! No way! None of the men there are attractive! I’ve been a slag actually, but I met my husband and fell in love at a frightfully old age when my slut career was coming to and end. I’d only had sex with 115 men, sad in a way. Maybe discussing my sex life with strangers and trying to convince them that I’m a good girl who was a virgin bride is my way to get a small illicit thrill on what it would be like to be a quality woman and be looked at as such. Gosh…..what a boring old husband I have!”

Every word of your last sentence is probably one you’ve uttered in public on more than a few occasions so there’s no need to translate that one. “Bloody loving all this attention from strangers, more please.” And 15 minutes later you were giving blow jobs to 3 different men in a hotel room.

Christians can be attractive I just don’t like them or their beliefs and avoid them.
Sort of like the idea of my exciting life. Last night I actually: got in from work and made dinner, played on the xbox, had some ice-cream and watched a 1980s comedy with my husband, shower and then bed. So tame and dull.
You flatter me but this feed probably is the only real excitement I’m getting right now.
Tell me some more of what you think I’m doing. But details this time. Describe the men (particularly their cocks), what was the hotel room like? sleazy or posh? Why was I doing it? Am I whore or just a slut? Did they come down my throut, in my face or on my tits? I need to know these things!

Are you OK? I didn’t claim to be a great wife. Not only are you imagining me giving multiple blow jobs now you’re imagining my saying things I haven’t said. Do you think maybe you should see someone, a doctor?
Hope you are going to be OK. Maybe just try having a lie down to see if that helps.

Trickle truth. This is what females do and this is what you’ve done. First, you say you’ve never fucked any bad boys. Then you say you may have because you fucked strangers who may or may not have been bad boys. Your next response will be “Come to think of it I did fuck a couple of bad boys but they were in succession and I never did it again.” Then it will be “Yeah I fucked a bunch of bad boys but I only did it at university and I was only there for 5 years and there were only like 30 or 40 of them and it was along time ago.”

Secondly, you’re muddying the waters with the typical argument that says “Your definition of a bad boy might be different from mine.” We both know what we’re talking about. It’s the males who arouse you. Plain and simple. Call them bad boys, fuck boys, alpha males whatever. But you know one when you see one and we both know it.

Third, your husband wasn’t repulsed when he married you because you didn’t tell him about your misspent youth. Why? Because you knew your chances of him marrying you would drastically dwindle. You used trickle truth and little by little you told him a story here and a story there and before he knew it, he realized you had 75 such stories. That would repulse anyone.

Next, I love how you condone sluttiness but you’ve never been slutty. LMAO!!!! Could that be anymore transparent???? That’s like a dude saying “I don’t see anything wrong with child pornography but I’ve never done such a thing!” LOL

Lastly, your husband is a loser and you know it. How do I know? If he knew about your slutty past before he married you but married you anyway, he obviously didn’t have any other options. But according to you, he knows all of your dirty little secrets and he’s still married to you. If your husband had any self respect or other options in the dating market, he’d have dropped your ass after story number 30 about how you got drunk and got ass fucked in the back of his car. Again, that shows he has no other options.

Let me take a stab at this: Your husband is probably short, balding, not in very good shape, and probably doesn’t make much money. Because if he were tall in good shape and made good money he most certainly would not have married you (or stayed married TO you when you had “story time with slutty fiona!”)

I said it once and I’ll say it again, darling. You’re not fooling anyone here. You don’t have some blissful 15 year marriage with a 6’4″ adonis with ripling abs a 6 figure income and movie star looks who loves you for you and thinks it’s funny that you’re a slut. NOBODY’S BUYING THAT. Little by little you’ve revealed more and more about yourself and all you’re doing is pinning yourself in a corner and eventually the truth will be obvious.

Quit while you’re ahead and save yourself the humiliation. The jig is up darling.

What are you on?
Why are you so obsessed with ‘bad boys’? Are you attracted to bad boys? Maybe I should have sought some out if they are so much fun.
Unfortunately I only slept with 5 guys between losing my virginity at 18 and settling into a serious relationship at 19. The adventures you describe are but fantasies for me.

Your concern for my husbands self respect is touching. I will tell him about it and see what he says.

“Eventually the truth will be obvious ” – er, you said it was already ‘obvious’ after the first comment. Don’t go changing your mind now, your insane certainty about the sex lives of strangers may be all you have going for you, please don’t let me shake that.

Yeah, I don’t actually find having strangers lay into my imaginary slutty past and imaginary loser husband ‘humiliating’. Why would I? I find it mildly interesting and wonder what you are going to acuse me of next.

Again, the term “bad boys” is a universal term for men who arouse women. The title is of little consequence. You’re deflecting but that’s not surprising.

And yes, you did go after then and probably still do. You’re not fooling anyone with the “LOL maybe I should have been a slut” or “lol maybe I should go after bad boys” assuming we believe that you aren’t and didn’t. Your tactics are predictable.

And if none of this were true, you wouldn’t be defending yourself for going on what 3 days now? LOL Again, you and I both know who and what you are. You’re a woman who’s on a website defending your chastity to men who are strangers. If you really were who you said you were you wouldn’t be here. It’s really as simple as that.

Red pill ideas aside, there is an intriguing hypothesis advanced by private investigator William Dear that OJ’s son Jason killed the 2 people then (in a panic) called and asked OJ to come to the crime scene to help him, which OJ did. According to Dear, Jason had Intermittent Rage Disorder but had stopped taking his meds for that relevant condition. He was a physically strong young man, unlike the oft-injured OJ. He was also trained in knife fighting and was a professional chef with his very own set of knives. He had attacked a girlfriend with a knife previously. He had been stood up by Nicole and other family members the night of the murders. And most significantly (IMHO), OJ hired a defense attorney named Carl Jones the day after the murders to represent Jason, even though Jason was not yet a suspect and it was to be several days before the selected suspect OJ was arrested. Why on earth would OJ hire an attorney for someone who had nothing to do with the crimes? It seems to me that OJ may very well be guilty of being an accessory after the fact, but that he did not commit the crimes directly. http://www.businessinsider.com/oj-simpson-murders-and-jason-simpson-2014-6

I’ve heard that Jason could have been involved, but it’s far more likely that he was an accomplice to OJ. OJ is the one who regularly beat and attacked Nicole, and had the larger motive. Plus his book If I Did It basically admits that he did it. He also admits to having an accomplice there, which I believe Mark Fuhrman also theorized, but since he used the n word in a piece of fiction, he was persona non grata and ignored.

“All of the evidence pointed to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer.”
Are you sure? Have you seen the William C. Dear documentary or read his book. I only saw the documentary. “O.J. Is Guilty But Not of Murder” builds a credible case that the killer was OJ’s son and OJ covered it up and took the rap.

Right
Like the smoke screens Joos created with the NFL killing… The Mafia, Castro, the Russians, The Unions, Hoffa et al
Meanwhile the Joos did it. Israel got nukes three months after his death and jfk clearly opposed them for Israel. Then his silver backed currency was scrapped, and Vietnam, which he opposed was brought on. From 18 k advisors under Jfk to 390k troops under Lbj within 18 months of jfks death.

See Michael Collins Pipers book Final Judgment. It’s one of the few banned books in America yet is a best seller internationally and details all of it. He died under mysterious circumstances recently

Looks like a thinly-veiled justification for the murder of two people, dindunuthin.

0

0

Top 5 Most Popular Posts

Submit an article for ROK and get paid

For the month of January, we are running a promotion where we will pay you in Litecoin cryptocurrency for any article of yours that we publish. If you have something to say to your fellow man, now is a great time to do it. Click here to learn all the details.

ROK Donation Drive

If you’re getting value from ROK, consider making a donation through the Roosh Booster Club to help us publish better articles and compensate our writers. Your donation is crucial in the face of Silicon Valley’s cockblocking campaign against us. Click here to learn full details.

Flagship ROK Shirt Has Landed

After many months of delay, we have launched Red Kings Shop to provide you with ROK apparel that will Kratomize your testosterone levels, massively increase the size of your penis, and make you the most beloved shitlord in your city. Click here for launch details.